Liberal immigration minister keeps ignoring what the vast majority of Canadians want
In a democratic country, the government is supposed to listen to what the people want.
After all, the government exists to serve the people, not the other way around.
Unfortunately, Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen and the Liberal government continue to ignore Canadians on the very important issue of Canada’s immigration levels.
Recently, Ahmed Hussen announced that he wants to see more refugees enter Canada through the economic immigration stream, and says that he’ll push for “higher refugee numbers every single year.”
“My wish is that we continue to increase levels in our immigration system for refugees. I’m very open to saying that, and I will do whatever I can, in whatever position I am in, to continue to push for higher refugee numbers every single year. One way to dramatically increase those levels would be to open up economic immigration streams to refugees in addition to humanitarian programs, Hussen said.”
Note the word usage here.
Hussen is calling for “dramatically” increasing refugee numbers every year. He and the Liberals have also pushed for record high immigration levels, increasing immigration by almost 33 percent over the Harper government levels – which were already quite high.
Considering that the Liberals continue moving in one direction – higher and higher immigration—you would think that Canadians are asking for that policy.
But it’s just the opposite.
In survey after survey, Canadians have made clear that they want lower immigration levels, and oppose the increases being imposed by Hussen and the Liberals.
Even CBC had to report on a Leger poll showing a clear majority of Canadians—63 percent—want the government to limit immigration levels, compared to 37 percent who want immigration levels to grow.
Other polls have shown almost no support for the immigration policies of the Trudeau Liberals. An August, 2018 Angus Reid poll showed just 6% of Canadians want “more immigration.”
While different polls show different numbers, the trend is consistent. A majority of Canadians reject the idea of increasing immigration levels, let alone massive increases.
Yet massive increases are exactly what the Liberals are imposing.
And when confronted with polls showing opposition to their immigration policies, Hussen and the Liberals repeatedly double down and criticize Canadians, instead of listening.
Reports indicate Hussen referring to the trend of opposition to higher immigration as ‘concerning,’ and pinned it on the Conservatives, as reported by Global News:
“We used to have a political consensus on immigration, but what worries me is looking at the other side and seeing the leader of the official Opposition taking a stance that is rooted in misinformation and conspiracy theories… basically spreading myths about immigration. It’s unbecoming of a leader to do that and has a corrosive effect on our social fabric.”
Notice how Hussen denies any agency to the majority of Canadians who disagree with him. He assumes that anyone who views things differently must have been fooled by a ‘myth,’ and ignores the fact that the ‘political consensus’ on immigration has collapsed under the reign of the Liberals.
Support for immigration can be maintained when people feel immigration levels are reasonable and manageable. But when people feel the government is going against their wishes and massively increasing immigration levels, support for immigration is bound to decline. Additionally, the refusal to take action on the issue of illegal border crossers has reduced confidence in the entire immigration system.
So, Ahmed Hussen and the Liberals have created the very situation they claim to be afraid of. Their arrogance, ignorance, and mismanagement has hurt support for legal immigration, and is increasingly dividing our nation.
It’s about time that Ahmed Hussen stop dictating policy to Canadians, and start listening to what the people of this country actually want.
Canadian trans activist Jessica Yaniv has been threatened with legal action after telling her Twitter followers that The Post Millennial‘s Amy Eileen Hamm sexually assaulted her. So to avoid this, Yaniv must issue a full public apology and retract her statement immediately.
The original incident occurred on January 15th, in which Yaniv accused Hamm on twitter of sexually assaulting her in the courthouse. Yaniv described the incident as “vicious,” stating that she had to seek out a rape crisis centre.
The legal letter that was sent to Yaniv after this incident, stated that “Ms. Hamm intends to commence legal action against you. Your lies have publicly damaged her. She has suffered embarrassment and humiliation … you are much larger and more psychically imposing, dwarfing her psychically.”
The letter went on to say, “We hereby demand a public apology and immediate retraction of your defamation … further harassment of Ms. Hamm will be met with immediate legal action.”
This letter will come as a blow to Yaniv who is currently facing other legal troubles. Yesterday, the trans activist was arrested and charged with assault after lashing out and smacking a Rebel Media commentator on camera.
Yaniv’s alleged assault of the Rebel Media commentator was outside a courthouse where she appeared in court on weapons charges, after revealing she owned a taser on Blaire White’s Youtube Channel.
The National Capital Commission passed a vote Thursday which gives the green light for a national monument to the LGBTQ2+ community in Ottawa.
The monument is planned to be located on the south shore of the Ottawa River by the Fleet Street Pumping Station next to the Portage Bridge near the Royal Canadian Navy Monument.
The monument is being built to acknowledge public servants who were purged from their positions in the 1950s all the way out into the 1960s.
The monument will be covered by the LGBT Purge Fund, a not-for-profit corporation that was established in Canada in October 2018 to manage a $15–25 million fund.
The money for the fund was provided from a settlement of a class-action lawsuit between the Government of Canada and the LGBTQ2+ community once employed by the Canadian Armed Forces, the RCMP, and the Canadian federal public service.
“LGBT members of the Canadian Armed Forces, the RCMP, and the federal public service were systemically discriminated against, harassed and often fired as a matter of policy and sanctioned practice. They were followed, interrogated and abused. This shameful period is known as the “LGBT purge” and it generally took place in Canada from the 1950’s to the mid-1990’s,” reads the Purge Fund’s website.
LGBT Purge Fund Executive Director Michelle Douglas told CTV News Ottawa that “more than a symbol, building a permanent monument to mark the discrimination experienced by LGBTQ2+ Canadians will create opportunities to educate and inspire its visitors.”
There will be a two-stage competition to determine the design of the monument.
The city of Wuhan in China has been quarantined by the Chinese government. The cities public transportation and airport are being shut down to contain the coronavirus which was first detected in Wuhan. So far 17 people have died because of the virus and 500 others have become sick.
According to Fox News, warnings have been issued to travellers by health agencies in other countries. Enhanced screening procedures have also been implemented in many countries for flights coming in from the Wuhan area.
China is under scrutiny because officials did not release all of the information they had on the virus when it was first discovered. The health officials in China maintained that only 41 people had been infected for weeks. They said there were a very small number of deaths related to the virus.
Lower level officials have reportedly been cautioned not to cover up any known spreading of the virus which is thought to be able to pass between humans.
The country was also accused of covering up the severity of the SARS virus which took place between 2002 and 2003. The virus killed 770 after infecting approximately 8,000. The public did not learn about the virus until around five months after it was noticed.
It has been reported that including the U.S., five countries outside of China have announced cases of the coronavirus.
Symptoms of the virus include a cough, fever and shortness of breath. The National Institute of Health says that they are currently in the early stages of making a vaccine for the virus.
Monday’s march for the 2nd Amendment in Richmond, Virginia went off without a hitch. Contrary to early reports that “swarms” of “white nationalists” would be descending upon the Virginia state capitol to protest gun control laws enacted by the commonwealth’s General Assembly, most—if not all—of the gun rights activists remained orderly and self-composed.
Gun rights marchers expelled speakers who called for violence. In one instance, an antifa member “Goad Gatsby” called out a neo-Nazi named Jovi Val, who allegedly wore a swastika to the event.
Despite the peaceful protest, NBC reporters portrayed the event in negative terms, and even lied about it. MSNBC’s Chris Hayes claimed in a broadcast that the rally sent an “explicit and implicit message” of “don’t you dare enact our policies, if you do, we will use these guns against you.” If anything, the Framers would be proud of seeing Americans generations ahead of them stand up for their God-given rights to defend themselves against the tyranny of an overbearing government.
The media’s message is that standing up for your rights is a violent action in and of itself—it’s a narrative that continues to be propped up. Writing for the men’s publication, disgraced New Yorker fact-checker Talia Lavin says that “the threat of violence in Richmond,” and the few arrests of alleged neo-Nazis planning violence that were made prior to the event “sent other groups into hiding.”
A Canadian neo-Nazi is currently being prosecuted for his alleged intention to commit violence in Richmond. He recorded a video calling for “violent revolution” ahead of his failed attempt to participate in the gun rights rally.
According to Lavin’s spin, the thousands of protesters attending the rally (which includes activists from the Black Panthers movement, pro-gay rights libertarians, 2nd wave feminists, and many others who support the right to bear arms) only “grumblingly abided” Governor Ralph Northam’s state of emergency declaration. The description she uses to describe the marchers is biased, to say the least:
“But just outside the legions of police barricades, twice that number of people roamed the streets of Richmond bearing a bristling mass of rifles, from AR-15s to massive Barrett sniper rifles. Some wore skull masks; others waved Confederate flags. Members of hate groups like the League of the South and the American Guard, as well as the Proud Boys, mingled openly; some of the latter were wearing patches that said “RWDS”—an acronym for “Right-Wing Death Squad.” Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones gave a speech from a Terradyne battle tank.”
A Terradyne “battle tank”? Really?
Firstly, the Terradyne is a glorified SUV. And second, even APCs aren’t tanks. Those BearCats the police use? Yeah, those aren’t tanks either. Come on, journalists—you can’t keep confusing Remington 870s for AR-15s.
Digression aside, the mention of “skull masks,” “massive Barrett sniper rifles,” and “Confederate flags” paints a less-than-friendly picture of the march. But as video footage of the march itself exists, it’s a false depiction of a peaceful event that’s very easily dispelled. We can watch the footage too, you know.
One can see now why Lavin was forced to resign from her position as fact-checker at the New Yorker after falsely accusing an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent of having a Nazi tattoo. The tattoo in question was a Maltese Cross, often seen in paramedic and firefighter insignias. One wonders if she will issue a correction properly describing the event from an unbiased, fact-based perspective.
Lavin then concedes, or more accurately laments, the fact that no one was shot at the event, describing it as “a frankly extraordinary turn of events given the sheer amount of weaponry, the density of the crowd, and the weapons stuffed casually into backpacks or held loosely in the crooks of pale arms.”
“Pale arms.” The subtext is clear: white people who stand up for their right to self-determination are prone to acts of violence.
There’s an old saying made popular by gun rights activists that holds true, especially following the media’s inability to reconcile the abundance of firearms with the lack of violence: an armed society is a polite society.
Diverging, or at least pretending to diverge from the mainstream view that “man with guns = bad,” Lavin opines that both “fringe-right publications” as well as the mainstream media declared the event a “peaceful protest.” Why, it seems that reality may indeed have a conservative bias. None of this matters to Lavin, of course, who argues that violence was only “narrowly averted” because some wingnuts from a neo-Nazi organization called The Base were arrested prior to the event.
This is, of course, a poor read on the event. While neo-Nazis may have in fact been planning to enact violence at the Virginia state capitol, the fact remains that the estimated 22,000 people who walked for their right to bear arms had nothing but peaceful intentions. Also worth noting is the fact that the 22,000 figure, provided by Richmond authorities, is whittled down to a mere 6,000 by Lavin in her piece. Surely giving readers the impression that more than a few thousand people care about their 2nd Amendment rights is a fact that would fly in the face of her narrative that it’s an issue only dangerous neo-Nazi skull masks care about.
The piece is full of “what ifs” and “could haves”—what if The Base members weren’t arrested? They could’ve killed thousands of people, surely. Wouldn’t that feed ratings for an entire news cycle?
“There was, it was true, an absence of immediate bloodshed,” continues Lavin. “But what abounded, in that armed and insurrectionist sea of humanity, was the promise that bloodshed might happen at any time, should the will of the mob be thwarted.”
The promise of bloodshed isn’t a promise being made by those defending the 2nd Amendment. As the events in Waco and Ruby Ridge tell us, the only real bloodshed would be caused by a government overreaching and tyrannical in its nature. The right to bear arms is what prevents such violence from being enacted unto the citizenry. Thus always to Tyrants.